The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPhilip Giraldi Archive
A Mellower Romney?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Anyone who is nurturing the belief that Mitt Romney is only talking tough re his foreign policy so he can get elected and that he will somehow mellow after November should consider some recent developments. Romney’s “retreat” in Park City Utah for his 700 biggest donors featured Condi Rice, who reportedly electrified the crowd and received two standing ovations during her passionate keynote speech defending a return to a George W. Bush-style foreign policy while trashing Obama for not being aggressive enough towards enemies like Iran and China. She indicted the president for failing to maintain America’s position as the “world leader,” a theme that comes straight out of the Romney play book.

Romney also told 100 donors at a breakout session on U.S.-Israel relations that “he had just been briefed by Israeli ambassador Michael Oren, speaking about the situation in Syria, the elections in Egypt and the effort to isolate Iran…” Bill Kristol, Michael Chertoff, and former Senator Norm Coleman also were invited guests who spoke at the meeting. One might reasonably be disturbed to learn that a presidential candidate is getting advice on sensitive foreign-policy issues in direct meetings with an ambassador whose country has a clear interest in creating certain perceptions, but apparently no one in Park City Utah was upset by Romney’s revelation.

(Republished from The American Conservative by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Mitt Romney 
Hide 5 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. “Condi Rice, who reportedly electrified the crowd and received two standing ovations during her passionate keynote speech defending a return to a George W. Bush-style foreign policy while trashing Obama for not being aggressive enough towards enemies like Iran and China.”

    Boy, did these people not read the Rumsfeld and or Cheney books as to their views of Condi Rice? Scary.

  2. TomB says:

    Condi Rice “indicted the president for failing to maintain America’s position as the ‘world leader.’”

    Ah, the old “USA! USA! USA!” Olympic chant as geo-politcal grand strategy. And, no less, from the esteemed Condi, perhaps the Secretary of State with the most invisible impact on anything, ever.

    Seems to me there’s no better illustration of the dangerousness of these sorts of people—Romney people now it seems—than how hallucinogenic this Rice talk is.

    The U.S. being aggressive towards China? For what? And more to the point *with* what? We have even less military wherewithal to go challenging them than we do industrial or financial anymore, largely thanks to dupes like Ms. Rice led to spill untold amounts of our military blood and financial treasure into the sands of the ME for over a decade now, for nothing.

    So after presiding over reducing our military to a tired, exhausted, disillusioned force, spending ourselves into bankruptcy (not least paying for their monstrous martial blunderings), and in general reducing us to well-deserved depression and pessimism, they now play the “USA! USA! USA!” jingoism card. Fight China! Fight Russia! Fight … somebody/anybody!

    My God how intellectually bankrupt these people are. How absolutely and utterly fraudulent their pretensions are to actually be concerned with any ideas. It is any wonder they are so easily led with their bovine pride in having the mentality and sensibilities of soccer yobs?

    As much as Obama has done bad, especially recently—playing racial/ethnic politics as he has even, despicably—there’s nothing, absolutely *nothing* that he’s done even approaching this level of risking harm to this country.

    That post a little while ago by some TAC author talking about how desultory this election choice is was wrong: However bad you think Obama is—and that can be very bad indeed—it’s nothing next to observing how Romney is saying he will act.

    Contra to Phil Giraldi’s description of him endorsing a Bush-like foreign “policy” there’s no policy of any real name here. “Policy” implies a though-through plan of action, way beyond what these folks are capable of. They’re more like dogs with distemper who can’t tell friend from foe and so go from lying dazed on the ground to fits of vicious snapping and attacking due to the mental exhaustion the disease causes.

    God help us.

  3. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Obama continued Bush’s second-term foreign policies with minor adjustments. If Romney is elected, he will continue Obama’s policies with minor adjustments. Why? Because American policy is dictated by (a) America’s national interests, (b) political pressure groups, and (c) the international environment. These things usually don’t change very quickly, and therefore neither does American foreign policy. Take what Romney is saying now about as seriously as Obama’s promise to renegotiate NAFTA.

  4. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “Condi Rice [] Bill Kristol, Michael Chertoff, and former Senator Norm Coleman ”

    It would appear that the Tea Party’s work is never done. Certainly not as long as (a presumably sane) Romney campaign is courting the likes of the above.

  5. I think Rice has the inside track to be Romney’s VP – she has the foreign policy credentials he lacks (as do Rubio, Pawlenty, and Jindal, etc.), she would make mincemeat out of Biden, and although there would be no rush of black or women voters to the GOP standard, Rice would soften the Republican image as out of touch with those constituencies. She’s a war hawk in the mold of Cheney, and that kind of rhetoric still rings loudly among many in the electorate – scary. Between the Republican convention and election day, if Iran makes a goofy statement or tribal warfare breaks out in Libya , the GOP will look/sound tough as compared to the Democrats. In my opinion, we actually have more to fear from a Romney administration than four more years of Obama.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Philip Giraldi Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Shouldn't they recuse themselves when dealing with the Middle East?
A Modern Guernica Enabled by Washington
Pressuring Candidates Even Before They Are Nominated
But is it even a friend?
The gagged whistleblower goes on the record.
Today’s CIA serves contractors and bureaucrats—not the nation.